Дефиниция «цифровая криминалистика» как начало ложного направления в науке. Часть 1

Abstract

Purpose. To compare and analyze the trend of appearance of the pseudo-term “digital criminology” in the science of criminology and prove that this is incorrect. Methodology: induction, deduction, synthesis, analysis, formal legal method, comparative legal method, logical method. Conclusions. The evolution of methods of committing crimes and instruments of crime does not always require the evolution of the science of criminology and the emergence of its varieties. You just have to assess the prospects of extrapolative ways and methods of proving the circumstances of the crimes in the era of digitalization of social relations, in terms of the provisions of modern criminal law and only criminal-legal research unit. The definition of “digital criminalistics”, which has recently appeared in science, actually misleads the scientific community with its novelty and originality, since such criminalistics in nature does not exist a priori. It is necessary to speak only about forensic or expert research of carriers of digital (electronic or computer) information. In criminalistics, it is logical to develop a new direction-the forensic study of electronic media of digital information and the use of computer expertise in establishing all the circumstances of the crime committed. And this is just a new section of forensic technology, studying a new subject of research for this naki. Here, the traditional forensic methodology should be applied, which will be aimed “atlinking” the electronic carrier of digital information and the digital information itself to a specific crime and to a specific person. Scientific and practical significance. The research is aimed at orienting forensic theory and practice towards the study of specific objects and contributes to the fact that all these studies are further applicable to the practice of crime investigation, and not only for theoretical purposes.